In best-picture winner “Argo,” six Americans are whisked out of Iran amid the hostage crisis by an intrepid CIA ex-filtration expert Tony Mendez, played by Ben Affleck. In the run-up to the Oscars broadcast on Sunday, several people involved with the bizarre rescue mission—in which the Americans, hiding at the home of Canadian Ambassador Ken Taylor, posed as a Canadian film crew scouting locations for a sci-fi film—quibbled with the movie’s version of events. Even though the film gives most of the credit for the operation to the CIA, President Jimmy Carter told Piers Morgan last week that “90 percent of the contributions of the ideas and the consummation of the plan was Canadian.”

Taylor, played in the movie by Canadian actor Victor Garber, has been a particularly vocal critic of the film’s historical accuracy. Talking to students at Toronto’s Ryerson University, he said that Oscar-winning screenwriter Chris Terrio, “had no idea what he was talking about.” On Tuesday morning, Taylor called Speakeasy to discuss his reactions to the film. (He’ll be giving a talk on Friday about the rescue mission, known as the Canadian Caper, at the Americas Society/Council of the Americas that will be webcast live here.)

What exactly were you referring to when you said that Chris Terrio had no idea what he was talking about?

I think that Chris didn’t benefit from living in Iran during the revolution. He did a masterful job putting together a suspenseful and thrilling movie. But this was a movie that was made without any Canadian consultation. And we can live with that. But at the same time the “Canadian community,” if I can call it that, felt we played a larger and more active role than that which was portrayed in the movie.

Did you talk to Ben Affleck about this?

I spent some time with Ben Affleck—he phoned after the Toronto Film Festival when there was a lot of comment in Canada about the film. I advised him to change the caption at the end. The postscript now says something like “Canadians welcomed the cooperation of the CIA in sending the American diplomats home safely.” But the real turnaround came when President Jimmy Carter was on Piers Morgan last week. He came out and said he thought the movie was wonderful but distorted, and that the real hero of the story is Ken Taylor, although I know it is a little self serving to say that.

The whole debate over historical inaccuracy here in the U.S. seemed to be focused on “Zero Dark Thirty.”

There’s a paradox there. As a layperson looking from the sidelines, the debate engendered by the three leading contenders—“Zero Dark Thirty,” “Argo,” and “Lincoln”—was: what sort of poetic license can Hollywood take? Should it matter?

What do you think? Should filmmakers be held to a higher standard when reenacting historical events?

I’d like them to adhere as close to possible to the historical record. At the same time I think some facts can be enlarged or embellished upon as long as the core is true. It’s like the Titanic: you know the ending but the suspense was still there.

What did you think of Victor Garber’s portrayal of you?

I thought he was very professional, very gracious. But I wish he had a bigger part.

And you weren’t actually the one who sheltered all the Americans at your house, right?

We had two and [Canadian diplomat] John Sherdown had four. I wasn’t troubled by that detail [of putting all six at the Taylors’ house in the film]. Of course, I realize that the essence of the story makes a great movie. Canada’s only concern was that the movie suggested that Canada got all the credit when it was really the CIA that deserved it. We are not very nationalistic but that aggravated us.

About Speakeasy

Speakeasy is a blog covering media, entertainment, celebrity and the arts. The publication is produced by Barbara Chai and Jonathan Welsh with contributions from the Wall Street Journal staff and others. Write to us at speakeasy@wsj.com or follow us on Twitter at @WSJSpeakeasy or individually @barbarachai.